Immigration = waves of democratic voters

[Wells]

I think you would be rather unpleasantly surprised at how far to the right even middle-class levels of success combined with living in a non-urban environment can pull people.

Yeah somehow I doubt they'll suddenly agree with GOP policy on gay people, uterine regulation and immigration policy just because they manage to climb to the middle class.

[Theinquisition]

Yea because the minority opinion should rule the majority opinion in a Democratic Republic country that's considered the leader of the free world. What horseshit. I don't get how they got away with that. Sure there are some common sense head scratchers for both sides but that is literally theft of people's votes.

Not really, why should New york make policy for say...Nebraska?

[Chrysia]

My question is, obviously if someone is immigrating here they are doing so because things were worse in their homeland, so why would they be wanting to bring policies from those same home countries?

Because they don't necessarily disagree with every part of their country of origin's policies, the good parts just weren't good enough to outweigh systemic abuse or other negatives.

[Theinquisition]

Yeah somehow I doubt they'll suddenly agree with GOP policy on gay people, uterine regulation and immigration policy just because they manage to climb to the middle class.

Coming from a very Hispanic area, from my experience, the only issue latinos are truly blue on is immigration reform. Your afraid of social conservatives in the southern states? Talk to some off the boat Mexicans, they make a average Mississippian look like a Boston liberal.

[Xyonai]

The overwhelming majority of Pennsylvanians that vote democrat are in Philly and Pittsburgh. There are just so many people there that 5% of the landmass make decisions for the other 95% so of course they should only get 5% of the voting power. Its important that we dont let the far SW and SE coners of the state dictate how the state and country will be run for the other 95% of the state

That doesn't make a lick of god-damned sense. Of course that 5% deserves more voting power since more actual people live there. Land doesn't vote, people do.

[Theinquisition]

Because they don't necessarily disagree with every part of their country of origin's policies, the good parts just weren't good enough to outweigh systemic abuse or other negatives.

Maybe, just still kinda funny to me.

[Laize]

Yeah somehow I doubt they'll suddenly agree with GOP policy on gay people, uterine regulation and immigration policy just because they manage to climb to the middle class.

You speak as if I agree with those stances.

I hope the future GOP sticks to economics and politics rather than the bedroom.

[Tirivaria]

Because they don't necessarily disagree with every part of their country of origin's policies, the good parts just weren't good enough to outweigh systemic abuse or other negatives.

Or it could just be economics or educational opportunities. Even if they agree with all of their home country's policies, if it's a developing country and they have the opportunity to go to a top notch American university or they're being recruited by a major US company, who wouldn't take that?

[Theinquisition]

That doesn't make a lick of god-damned sense. Of course that 5% deserves more voting power since more actual people live there. Land doesn't vote, people do.

So what would be the motivation for the people living in rural areas to be part of the larger whole? Should states like New York make policy for Montana just because they have more people?

- - - Updated - - -

Or it could just be economics or educational opportunities. Even if they agree with all of their home country's policies, if it's a developing country and they have the opportunity to go to a top notch American university or they're being recruited by a major US company, who wouldn't take that?

Perhaps we should have more limitations on immigrants coming to America with Educational Visa's, especially if people here in our own country are having a hard time affording a college education.

[Wells]

Coming from a very Hispanic area, from my experience, the only issue latinos are truly blue on is immigration reform. Your afraid of social conservatives in the southern states? Talk to some off the boat Mexicans, they make a average Mississippian look like a Boston liberal.

http://latinainstitute.org/Latinopoll

74% of Latino registered voters agree that a woman has a right to make her own personal, private decisions about abortion without politicians interfering.

http://www.freedomtomarry.org/resour...rriage-polling

A Quinnipiac Polling Institute poll conducted February 27-March 4, 2013 showed 63% of Hispanic voters support same-sex marriage.

[Theinquisition]

You speak as if I agree with those stances.

I hope the future GOP sticks to economics and politics rather than the bedroom.

I agree with you here laize.

[Zamfix]

Immigrants -- all immigrants -- have always been the bulwark of the Democratic Party.

This is when you know you can stop taking someone seriously. That is simply false.

[Theinquisition]

http://latinainstitute.org/Latinopoll


http://www.freedomtomarry.org/resour...rriage-polling

That's one issue Wells, besides I'm glad that what you pointed out is true, im a social liberal you know.

[Wells]

You speak as if I agree with those stances.

I hope the future GOP sticks to economics and politics rather than the bedroom.

I see ass-all chance of that happening when they know the social conservatives will run against them if they're not feeling their needs are served. They made a deal with the devil and this is what they get.

[Orlong]

So lets say I buy a couple hundred acres of nothing out in eastern washington, easy enough to do. Should I wield more voting power than most of downtown Seattle?

I think districts should be drawn based on land mass and not population density. Using PA as an example other than Pittsburgh and Philly, the rest of the state is Amish, farmers, country folk, and retired people. Why should all the young yuppy city slickers votes always be the one that wins elections when they and the candidates they vote for know nothing about the needs of the farmers and Amish (nor do they probably even care about them since they think they are all hayseeds). We need equal representation for equal landmass not population density

[Wells]

That's one issue Wells, besides I'm glad that what you pointed out is true, im a social liberal you know.

That's two. The two I cited that you didn't agree on.

Point remains, hispanics fundamentally disagree with the GOP on a lot of their core platform, its going to be a huge problem for the GOP over the next 20 years.

[Felya]

So what would be the motivation for the people living in rural areas to be part of the larger whole? Should states like New York make policy for Montana just because they have more people?

Montana is one of the worst contributors versus receivers of federal spending, while New York is one of the highest payers versus receiving. My guess, if places like Texas and New York had voices that were as loud as their federal contribution, places like Montana would find better ways to use their money.

[Orlong]

Yea because the minority opinion should rule the majority opinion in a Democratic Republic country that's considered the leader of the free world. What horseshit. I don't get how they got away with that. Sure there are some common sense head scratchers for both sides but that is literally theft of people's votes.

But its the minority land mass ruling the majority land mass so thats ok? How are the rural folk and farmers supposed to get equal representation when city dwellers get to elect all the people that only care about them?

[Laize]

I see ass-all chance of that happening when they know the social conservatives will run against them if they're not feeling their needs are served. They made a deal with the devil and this is what they get.

Well then I look forward to joining whatever conservative party fills that power vacuum.

[Wells]

I think districts should be drawn based on land mass and not population density. Using PA as an example other than Pittsburgh and Philly, the rest of the state is Amish, farmers, country folk, and retired people. Why should all the young yuppy city slickers votes always be the one that wins elections when they and the candidates they vote for know nothing about the needs of the farmers and Amish (nor do they probably even care about them since they think they are all hayseeds). We need equal representation for equal landmass not population density

So some people should have their vote count for more because of where they live.

- - - Updated - - -

But its the minority land mass ruling the majority land mass so thats ok?

Land doesn't vote. People do.